PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 25, 1993
International Peacekeeping Reform Act of 1993 - Expresses the sense of the Congress that: (1) the United States should not be assessed a greater share for any international peacekeeping operation than the current U.S. share of the regular assessed budget for the international organization with jurisdiction over the operation; (2) all U.S. military assistance, logistical support, and in-kind contributions for an international peacekeeping operation should be fully counted toward the U.S. assessment for the operation or fully reimbursed; and (3) regional countries that would receive disproportionate benefit from the establishment of such operation should voluntarily provide a higher proportionate share of the operation costs. Prohibits funds authorized to be appropriated to the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities Account at the Department of State for the United States Peacekeeping Emergency Fund or which are not specifically designated for an existing peacekeeping operation from being made available for any peacekeeping operation of an international organization in which the United States assessed share exceeds its assessed share for the regular budget for such organization.
People & committees
Rep. Snowe, Olympia J. [R-ME-2] · R–ME
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2260 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2260 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2260 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2260 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.